“One of the most important promises made by President Obama and Democrat congressional leadership to promote the Affordable Care Act was that Americans who were satisfied with their health plans could keep them. That promise has been broken. More than a million Americans have been notified that the plans they like with the coverage they have chosen have been canceled. Millions more Americans will have the plans of their choice canceled in months to come.”

“Americans want the freedom to choose their own plans and want to be in control of their own health care. They don’t want Obamacare destroying what they have and what they like. They don’t want their personal choices regarding their health plans and their families’ health plans canceled by Obamacare.

“The ‘If You Like Your Health Plan, You Can Keep It Act’ will amend the law to make Obamacare live up to the promises of the politicians who sold the plan to the American public. I will file the bill in the coming week and hope to garner support from fellow Senators of both parties who truly want to make sure President Obama honors his promise that every American has the freedom to keep his or her own health care plan.”

Like Rubio’s bill to delay the mandate, this is superb politics but I think it’s a nonstarter for Dems for the simple reason that it goes a lot further than extending the enrollment period, not a little. Slowly but surely, news about people’s coverage getting dropped is starting to compete with news about Glitchapalooza for public attention. If there’s any one talking point even casual observers took away from Obama’s 8,000 speeches on ObamaCare over the past three years, it’s the “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan” crapola. Because that idea is so prominent, and is being revealed day by day as a gigantic lie, O’s uniquely exposed on it; by extension, so are Senate Dems. For that reason, voting against Johnson’s bill to make Obama live up to his promises will be excruciating for them, and of course he knows it. Like I say, great politics.

But they do have to vote against it, I think, partly because bipartisan passage would be simply too humiliating for the White House and partly because, if it became law, it would upset the sick/healthy redistribution scheme at the heart of ObamaCare. Wonks are invited to correct me if I have any of this wrong, but I thought the reason so many plans are being canceled now is because they don’t include all of the “essential benefits,” like substance-abuse treatment, now required by law under ObamaCare. One of the reasons those essential benefits are now mandatory is because the more comprehensive an insurer’s coverage is, the more it can charge for that coverage — even if it’s unlikely that the insured will ever use the new “essential” parts of it. It is, in other words, another way to gouge the healthy in order to help pay for the sick: If you’re going to force a healthy 21-year-old who doesn’t want insurance to fork over $200 per month, nearly all of which will be applied by the company towards paying for coverage of other people’s preexisting conditions, why not go ahead and force him to pay $300 per month instead by adding on extra crap he doesn’t need like substance-abuse coverage? More revenue!

If Johnson’s bill passes, though, and the “essential benefits” rule is lifted, then companies who have been required by law to cancel the $200 plan in favor of the $300 one will be able to bring the $200 one back. (They might not want to since it means forfeiting revenue, but competition might compel them.) That’s $100 less in revenue they’re collecting from the healthy 21-year-old each month; multiply that example by the hundreds of thousands or millions, with healthy young adults signing up for cheap catastrophic coverage instead of the more expensive ObamaCare-required “essential benefits” plans, and suddenly you’ve got a shortfall in the industry between expenditures for the sick and revenue from the healthy. What happens then? Like I said yesterday, this law is an enormous Jenga skyscraper; you pull pieces from it at your own risk. Although that doesn’t detract from Johnson’s shrewdness in making Democrats squirm over it. They deserve to. Let them explain why it’s good for America that people have fewer coverage options at greater personal expense.

If you missed it last night on Fox, here’s Megyn Kelly’s history of the Big Lie.

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

Nice sentiment, but I don’t think it will work. The only way to “fix” this mess, is to delete it and start over. I would recommend really, really small steps and wait 4 – 10 years before taking the next one.

They’re going to have to do something about the people that are losing coverage this year and who are not able to buy new coverage on the non-working exchanges, assuming that the exchanges are not fixed in time.

The GOP should be able force a fix on that problem now based on the need of people to buy for next year and not hope that the end of November timeline is successful for the exchange rebuild.

Whistleblower reveals TSA plan to deny travel to anyone who does not have health insurance. The plan reportedly will be linked to the IRS and HHS databases where travelers personal identification will be verified, and if no record of compliance with the ACA is found, that person will be denied boarding any aircraft. The plan also indicates the TSA will implement this policy not only at airports, but has plans to extend to trains, busses, ferry’s, and a host of other public conveyances.

I don’t know how they could possibly have mucked this up any more than they have. I’m scared to death what’s going to happen to my insurance I have through my employer. I’m afraid my worst nightmare is right around the corner.

Keep in mind the purpose is to crash the private insurance industry. It’ll only take a couple of months, and it will crumble.

You can only pay out benefits until you run out of cash. Wait….there’s more. Insurance companies are huge investors in the stock and mutual fund markets. In order to cover the federally mandated benefits with virtually no cash coming in, the insurance giants will have to start selling. In a big way.

I was just about to put this up in the previous Colorado liberal post but it fits in here … perhaps even better.

Drangstveit said many year-round residents in Summit County pay about 50 percent of their income for housing. Few jobs come with health insurance and overall expenses like food and gas also cost more in resort areas, leaving people with little extra cash to buy health insurance.

Please carefully THINK over the implications of the statement I have marked in bold …

I have said a number of times in the last year that Obamacare was going to be an economic disaster for the country.

Let’s expand leaving people with little extra cash to buy:

1) Health insurance – but this is NOT optional – Obamacare will take a fair portion of the money if you don’t buy health insurance .

3) Durable goods – as the name states things like refridgerators, furniture, electronics all tend to last for long periods of time – so the consumer under economic pressure does NOT buy these items.

4) Autos – in many states, the AVERAGE monthly INCREASE for health insurance in 2014 without deductibles is the price of a car payment.

5) Housing – as a result of the sub-prime crisis, home loan qualifications have gotten much more stringent, requiring documentation of income and expenses, the INCREASED cost for one-size-fits-all health insurance under Obamacare is going to keep many families from being able to buy a house.

The liberal Congressman has undoubtedly been getting an education from constituents NOT being in favor of government enforced impoverishment.

Senator Johnson may very well end up with Democratic co-sponsors before the year ends, AllahPundit – you see, unlike RINO bloggers, elected officials have to answer for their positions sooner or later.

Whistleblower reveals TSA plan to deny travel to anyone who does not have health insurance. The plan reportedly will be linked to the IRS and HHS databases where travelers personal identification will be verified, and if no record of compliance with the ACA is found, that person will be denied boarding any aircraft. The plan also indicates the TSA will implement this policy not only at airports, but has plans to extend to trains, busses, ferry’s, and a host of other public conveyances.

What does it say about our liberties when a Senator feels compelled to introduce legislation that if passed will allow us to keep our current health plan? Yeah I know it’s a rhetorical question but still good lord how much more of this can the country take?

this is way too late. It is very hard to put back together something that has taken years to put together.

actually it is noteworthy that the left knows this deep inside their ‘souls’…they don’t know how to build anything (except for mobs) but they do know that once dismantled a industry will take decades to recover. Those coal plants? gone for good. To restart them, even with friendly regulators would take a decade

that’s why the true anarchists are on the left. Tear it down…and let’s build a New Man

I do not think you are right about the reason(s) for the “essential benefits”. I think they are there because Obama and Co. think that’s the coverage one ‘should’ have. I’m not sure how this could save those who have already lost their plans, but it might enable ins. cos.to continue to offer low cost insurance and that might actually bring/keep relatively healthy people in the pool.

If Johnson’s bill passes, though, and the “essential benefits” rule is lifted, then companies who have been required by law to cancel the $200 plan in favor of the $300 one will be able to bring the $200 one back. (They might not want to since it means forfeiting revenue, but competition might compel them.)

They’re virtually guaranteed to offer the lower price plans. The left always thinks businesses want to gouge their customers as much as possible. The truth is, whether or not they would like to force customers into the higher-cost premiums, they know they’ll make a lot more money by lowering the price and selling more plans.

And the proof that this is so? They were offering the plans to begin with.

You could just as easily call Johnson’s plan the “Restore Insurance Competition” plan. Make no mistake: it’s the Democrats who will hate the plan. Not the insurance companies, and not the public.

I do not think you are right about the reason(s) for the “essential benefits”. I think they are there because Obama and Co. think that’s the coverage one ‘should’ have. I’m not sure how this could save those who have already lost their plans, but it might enable ins. cos.to continue to offer low cost insurance and that might actually bring/keep relatively healthy people in the pool.

Jocon307 on October 25, 2013 at 7:37 PM

And therein lies the problem with everything the left does. It should be none of his damn business, or anyone else’s for that matter, what coverage people should get, none at all. It should be up to the individual. Damn it how hard is this to understand?

Haven’t had a chance to follow the links yet, but any change like this has to be indefinite – meaning congress must vote on whether to reauthorize the delayed provisions – so, in practice, a repeal of that part of Obamacare, but one that is rhetorically more suited to more middle-of-the-road voters who may be on the fence about Obamacare on the whole.

In fact, this might be a good way to kill the thing – pass bills to “indefinitely delay” parts of Obamacare until the government can “get its act together.” Then let them try to pass the provisions again and see how far they get.

It would be sad that all these liberals fell for the biggest scam to hit Americans since, well, I don’t recall a president ever hoodwinking the country’s own citizens before, so EVER. But it’s not sad, it’s pathetic that they bought into all this lofty rhetoric and entrusted the government with their health care, forcing all the rest of us to be subjected to it as well. And all the while ridiculing the GOP for trying to stop it, only to find out it’s far worse than even the GOP warned about. It’s the biggest travesty I’ve ever seen, and I’ve been around over half a century.

The extermination of ‘existing policies’ is described on page 97 of the McBamacare bill. It is basically one line that states ‘you can grandfather in your policy as long as it does not change’.

In California, AFTER McBamacare was passed, the state legislature passed laws to mandate additional coverage for everyone to buy in California. This changed EVERY individual policy and made them subject to termination on Jan 1, 2014. Among the critical improvements that the Ca legislature added, was a stipulation to cover qualified gambling psycologists who are bilingual translators for compulsive Hmong gamblers.

One of the major hidden problems of Obamacare was its obligation that insurers cover everything that the Government wants them to cover, instead of allowing insurers to offer several plans with varying degrees of coverage and letting customers choose the plan they want. Obamacare essentially forced everyone into a “Cadillac” insurance plan, when many customers were satisfied with a “Chevy” plan.

So many people who have previously been covered by plans they found satisfactory have been dropped because the plan doesn’t meet Obama’s standards, and are forced to pay huge premiums for coverage they don’t want or need.

After Obama made a big deal of Sandra Fluke’s “need” for government-funded birth control, all insurance companies had to provide for it, but all men and women over 50 couldn’t care less about birth control or abortion coverage. Most people in their late 20’s or 30’s don’t care about coverage for heart disease or diabetes, and would prefer a simple, high-deductible plan which covers surgery and emergency care in the event of a major accident, but will pay the doctor themselves if they get the flu. But young women (and possibly their husbands) might want coverage for pregnancy and childbirth care, while older women could forego such coverage.

Until people realize the full impact of Obamacare, what is required is not only a delay in the individual mandate and enrollment period, but a delay in the REQUIREMENTS for Obama’s “gold, silver, and bronze” plans, most of which are priced like gold but provide the safety of rusted iron.

How many Democrats want to claim that they like forcing people off health insurance they like? Senator Johnson’s bill forces them to choose…

What does it say about our liberties when a Senator feels compelled to introduce legislation that if passed will allow us to keep our current health plan? Yeah I know it’s a rhetorical question but still good lord how much more of this can the country take?

bgibbs1000 on October 25, 2013 at 6:38 PM

What does it say about our liberties when we have to log into a website called healthcare.gov?

lol you got me, I was googling to find sources for that as I expect it to actually happen.

dmacleo on October 25, 2013 at 9:11 PM

What does it say about the current administration that the idea of them using TSH to help enforce legislation completely unrelated to TSH’s supposed mission is believable enough that we start googling it?

Enough of all these bullcrap, for nothing show bills. Show you care about the country. Show you really have a grasp on what is happening. Show you’ve got some balls. There is enough evidence to perp walk the scumbag.

Maybe I’m missing the bigger picture here, but another bill that, ultimately, is supposed to codify the concept of “it’s now possible to keep your insurance plan?”

In what universe is anything more than satire? King Bobo already made sure that he and his minions essentially destroyed the concept of market economics with respect to insurance markets; thereby destroying the capability of any insurance provider (a for-profit business, mind you) to provide more-or-less customizable services for particular and differentiated client bases. Then, this dunce comes around with ANOTHER bill, which again constrains choices amongst the parties involved in this privatized commerce, effectively playing the same game as the commie slugs that are unwinding the fabric of this nation more and more by the minute?

Perhaps the good Rep. (if there is such an animal) can explain why, outside of the obvious satire and reversal of phrasing to humiliate Bobo, there is even such an attempt? We are now wont to pay for professional satire in the Congress? I know, it figures, since the productive have to pay for everything unproductive anyway, but I have grown far beyond weary of the political theatre. There is not a single member of the Congress that has an semblance of honor or dedication to duty, and I, for one, will not support anybody who refuses to preach the first platform plank that I can believe in: immediate impeachment.

But they do have to vote against it, I think, partly because bipartisan passage would be simply too humiliating for the White House and partly because, if it became law, it would upset the sick/healthy redistribution scheme at the heart of ObamaCare.

They won’t have to vote against it because Reid will not allow it to get to the floor. It’s doubtful it will even be scheduled for committee hearing or markup.

But it is great politics just for the PR Sen. Johnson can generate by introducing the bill.

What does it say about the current administration that the idea of them using TSH to help enforce legislation completely unrelated to TSH’s supposed mission is believable enough that we start googling it?

LibraryGryffon on October 25, 2013 at 10:50 PM

yeah I know, pretty sobering isn’t it?
I don’t know if we can even tame this leviathan we (US as a whole, not specifically us) have allowed to self-propagate and grow.

Boy, this must really annoy Obama. He’s notoriously thin-skinned. I saw a clip of him griping that people were comparing him to an insurance salesman, “but that’s all right,” and promising it would all be fixed in a few weeks. Of course, it wasn’t all right. You could tell it made him sore, accustomed as he is to universal adulation.

He and Pelosi, I keep thinking that they live in a world of wishes where everything you think you be nice ought to be a law, and that’s about as far as they carry it. All the details are left to bureaucrats and federal spending to work out. From that perspective, I can understand how they can get impatient with criticism, even blaming failure on the doubters. Maybe if I were more of a cheerleader, I’d win the Publisher’s Clearing House prize, courtesy of the federal government. Of course, it’s only $5,000 a week for life and these guys in government are used to spending that much per minute, but that’s just a matter of scale.

Oh and I just got the data dump on what effect the ACA (ObummerCare) will have next year. On average the per employee impact will be $680 per year per policy. This does not include dental and vision care policies. Do any of the TROOLS wish to tell me that those cost are going to go down?
Yea, sure. Obowmao said so. ‘Your cost will go down 2,500%’
What a friggin’ moron.
And I STILL witness X-geners saying ‘They think ObamaCare is great’ Just like King Putt said, “It’s really good.”
And the LIVerals voted for this dumbshiite TWICE.
Heck, I’d bet they vote for him a THIRD time if they could.
There are a LOT of X-geners who are STUCK ON STUPID.They don’t know it yet but THEY are the MARK in this poker game.
Fools.